#343: Understanding Causality in Nutrition Science

In Podcasts by Danny Lennon2 Comments

Today's Topic in Focus: Understanding Causality in Nutrition Science
  • Inferring causality vs demonstrating causality
  • Hierarchy of evidence vs. standards of proof
  • The need for correlation, time precedence and non-spuriousness
  • Reductionism and erroneous application of the biomedical model to nutrition
  • The false causality dichotomy: RCTs vs. epidemiology
  • Understanding what the “highest quality evidence available” is
  • How nutritional epidemiology can infer causality
The Quack Asylum

Being consigned to the Quack Asylum in this episode is...

The ironically-titled paper "Dietary Recommendations for Familial Hypercholesterolaemia: an Evidence-Free Zone" by a who's who list of pro-LCHF, anti-statin, LDL-skeptics.

Random Recommendations

Alan's Recommendation: SS-GB (Netflix Series)
In an alternate-timeline 1941, the Nazis have won the Battle of Britain, forcing Detective Douglas Archer to work under the SS in occupied London. Based on the novel by the same name by Len Deighton. Watch it on Netflix.

Danny's Recommendation: Stumbling on Happiness - Daniel Gilbert
Bringing to life scientific research in psychology, cognitive neuroscience, philosophy, and behavioral economics, this bestselling book reveals what scientists have discovered about the uniquely human ability to imagine the future, and about our capacity to predict how much we will like it when we get there. Find it on Amazon or Book Depository.

Previous Episodes

Fan of the Podcast?

If you regularly enjoy listening to Sigma Nutrition Radio, then you might really love Sigma Nutrition Premium!

It's our Premium subscription that gives you extra episodes, bonus recap segments after discussions, detailed study notes for episodes, and special Q&A sessions with experts!

To learn more click here.


  1. I just want to say thank you very much for episode #343 on cuasation and the reference list, since I am presently interested in the topic much more generally, from a philosophical perspective.

    After listening lots of nonsense about causation it was really refreshing to hear this very pragmatic outlook about a field as experimentally messy as human nutrition. It strikes me that such research must be for optimists!

    I have long wondered about the pitfalls of meta analysis so will follow-up the Cartwright paper.

    As a podcast enthusiast it also struck me as having a great tone of dialogue and an interesting and healthy mix of scepticism and opneness to new ideas.

    Many thanks


Leave a Comment